Member Movie Reviews

John P. (AvraValleyJohn) from MARANA, AZ Reviewed on 7/20/2011...

Ok, so it's not a Hollywood blockbuster that cost millions to make. The special effects were good, the casting was good, and even the story line was plausible. After all, is not the purpose of a movie to entertain??? I highly recommend it to any scifi fans out there.

Movie Reviews

Inept sci-fi

Rottenberg's rotten book review | nyc | 10/25/2004

(2 out of 5 stars)

"This flick posits the world facing a doomsday solar flare in the near future. Tim Matheson leads a cast of boring action figures to the edge of the sun, where he will pilot a smaller spaceship into the sun while carrying an anti-matter bomb - what amounts to a suicide mission. (The science of solar flares theorizes that they form based on magnetic lines that work like rubber bands; the bomb will snap the lines and prevent the lethal flare from forming.) Meanwhile, Matheson's son escapes from his military school, and Matheson's disapproving father - Charlton Heston as an uptight career military man - sets out to find him. The flare is preceded by other solar phenomenon that's steaming up the earth (and interfering with anything that relies on basic principles of electromagnetism). While the mission must succeed for the sake of humanity, a sinister tycoon played by Peter Boyle is determined to sabotage it.

Nothing in this flick works - least of all why Boyle is set on sinking a mission that's clearly mankind's last hope (doubts over whether it may be worse than the flare or at least uneccessary seem to have been left out of the script). The plot about Matheson's son seems entirely uneccessary, even if it does allow for the obligatory showdown between Heston & Boyle. Lastly, what is the state of technology here? It looks like the near future (with concept versions of today's space and aircraft), but also with holograms and nearly sentient AI - embodied in a luscious fembot and the antimatter bomb's computer (voiced effectively by Paul Williams). "Crisis" rode the crest of early 1990's CGI (a path blazed by the new Trek show) in which then nifty effects made drama obsolete. Now its effects look dated, and the story remains as incomprehensible as before."

'Entertainment Crisis' more like.

ted gonzalez | 10/02/2000

(1 out of 5 stars)

"I saw this DVD on the shelf and thought "...wow, sci-fi...and look at the credits." Then I saw the actors...Charlton Heston, Tim Matheson...and the plot seemed somewhat plausible...for the future anyway, so I bought it. Then I watched it the first time, then a second, and a third. I came to the conclusion that this movie was composed entirely of what was on the cutting room floor. The plot was disjointed, the most of the characters were uninspired and unbelievable (especially Matheson who couldn't act his way out of a paper bag), and despite the great special effects (2001 was touted as a credit to the sfx crew) this turkey of a movie couldn't get off the ground...much less to the sun. I give it one because, as they say; 'zero wasn't an option'. If you buy it, play the sound track to 'Event Horizon'...it makes it so much more interesting."

The Worst SF Movie I ever saw.

A viewer | Redmond WA | 01/11/2000

(1 out of 5 stars)

"It was the first time I ever felt a need to fast forward through a video and even then I couldn't stand to watch it. Fast forwarding through all the action on earth I was dumbfounded by the impossible plot on the space ship. Special effects or not, this movie is not worth paying for, I didn't - (checked it out of the local library).Take a hint from the Director credit: Alan Smithee - the real director did not even want his name on it."

A FLARE WITHOUT FLAIR

Michael Butts | Martinsburg, WV USA | 03/14/2004

(3 out of 5 stars)

"SOLAR CRISIS, a Japanese/American co-production, never seems to understand what it wants to be. The main plot concerns a solar flare that will decimate the earth and kill all living habitants; a secondary plot involves a young military academy student who goes AWOL to join his father on the mission to deflect the solar flare. Thats where the movie's problem lies; the movie could have survived without the subplot at all. Makes it appear as though the writers felt the solar mission couldn't sustain the entire movie, so they threw in this other plot to make it 90 minutes. The only good thing about the subplot is the inspired performance by the late Jack Palance as a seemingly demented "road warrior."
As for the solar mission, Tim Matheson again sabotages a role that could have been played by countless other actors; Annabel Schofield makes for a lovely saboteur; and Dorian Harewood is the token minority who tries to keep things going on board. Charlton Heston is wasted as Matheson's father and Peter Boyle is his usual surly self as the corporate wizard who will stop at nothing to make money. Brenda Bakke as his sidekick slithers around, smoking funky looking cigarettes.
For a 1992 movie, the effects are adequate, and there is some suspense in the final moments, but overall, SOLAR CRISIS burns out because it's too heavy."

Not bad, coming from Vidmark Ent., but not good either

A viewer | 02/27/1999

(3 out of 5 stars)

"How they ever shanghied Charlton Heston into this movie I'll never know. Really good effects ( What did you expect from Rishard Edlund, 2010 effecter), decent acting, but stupid subplot on Earth which, unless you pay very close attention to the dialoge, has no relevence to the movie at all. The plotline aboard the Helios is good, but extremely marred by the earth bound one. The end rips off 2001, and the Widescreening of the movie hardly makes any differenceI enjoyed it somewhat. The effects make up for the bad subplot, and Charlton Heston is good as always. Good idea, which has been used in various forms for a long time, is presented in a way that makes you wish they had a bigger budget, because they were on the right track with Solar Crisis, but didn't have the money to give it the treatment it deserved. My advice, if you are a non-discriminating Sci-fi fan, get it, others beware."